Weekly market outlook: June 13-17th - keep attention on 2023

Narrator: Thank you for listening to the Weekly Market Outlook. It is our pleasure to bring an industry-leading market analyst to provide you with the most value possible in your farm business. Please reach out anytime by emailing cbarron@agviewsolutions.com.

Scott

Berger: Well, welcome everybody to the Ag View Pitch. This week here we're going to have a conversation with Jared Green and we're going to have some new hosts I'm Scott Berger from East Central Iowa, and we're going to have Joe Paulson from North Central Illinois jump on here, and we're going to grill Jared Kries today. So Jared, welcome to the podcast.

Jerod

Creed: Thanks, guys. I'm enjoying the change of scenery. I guess I shouldn't say change of scenery, but new hosts. You got your work cut out for you, don't you?

Joe

Paulson: We do. Big shoes to fill.

Scott

Berger: We do. Everybody sets the bar high here, so we're just gonna, we're gonna try to shoot for the middle and see where we go.

Jerod

Creed: Sounds like a plan.

Scott

Berger: All right, so, uh, Jared here, um, you know, we're recording this after the report came out on Friday. Why don't we just go ahead and start there? It seemed to be a little bit of a mundane report, but what stuck out with you?

Jerod

Creed: Sure, so I think the two biggest items that were anticipated key on this report was any further updates on Ukraine potential production. That was actually probably the biggest number, you know, I'd say potential production, the crop that they are wrapping up trying to plant right now. Remember last year Ukraine had a record corn crop of 42 million tons, and there was a segment of the industry that wanted to start from zero production. There is a segment of the industry that wanted to start with 75% of production. You know, where do we, where do we end up settling in at? And today's report actually jumped Ukraine anticipated production for this summer up by 5 million tons versus the May number.

And I would expect that you're going to continue to see quite a bit of gyration in that number over the next couple of months, especially given just the unknowns circling around what kind of fieldwork can get done in Ukraine. But long, long term, a production estimate is one thing, but we still have to try to get the grain out of country. Earlier this week, President Zelensky, you know, was on record saying that they anticipate having as much as 75 million tons of grain, primarily corn and wheat, stuck in the country come this winter. And they've had their work cut out for them trying to get grain out of the country in the first place. They've been able to move some on rail, uh, without getting in the weeds there. It's quite a painful situation.

One of the things you just never would guess, uh, until all this, uh, you know, the conflict arose— they have a different rail size, a different rail system from leaving Ukraine going into the EU. So trains that are making their way into western Ukraine are more or less having to be offloaded onto a new train to make their way out of the country. That is a very inefficient way to move 50, 60, 70 million tons of grain out of Ukraine. And at the same time, you know, maybe what sparked this market at the beginning of this last week was additional information or rumors or just conflict happening near, at, around— I guess it depends what you want to believe, what you read. Around additional grain export facilities in Ukraine.

So the— in my opinion here, the probability of seeing Ukraine exports get back to where they were from a percentage of crop size, you know, from 12 months ago and 24 months ago, it's basically impossible to happen, especially with their president more or less saying that we're going to be stuck with all this grain. So there's two, two kind of takeaways from that. First, on the supply side, we haven't changed any available supply or just supply in country in Ukraine for quite some time. The supply has been there and it's not changing. Getting it out of the country is a whole nother monster, especially if they are going to produce another, you know, a reasonable crop, mid-20s metric tons of corn, you know, close to a billion bushels or a touch under, I should say.

If they find a way to get that out of the country, that will, you know, that will soften the fears of a supply shortage in other parts of the world that are depending on sourcing grain from Ukraine. Now, one other comment that, you know, I hate to spend too much time on the Ukraine conflict, but it was very intriguing that Ukraine had more or less been in talks with Turkey and the UK, the United Kingdom, to help provide safe passage of grain vessels leaving country. On the surface, that seems like a, you know, a pretty cool concept to make it happen.

But the risks associated with perhaps having a country such as the United Kingdom providing that safe passage and something happens to one of their vessels or one of their, you know, more or less warships providing safe passage, in the event that Russia or Putin decided to attack that, that just opens up a whole nother Pandora's box because now you're bringing in maybe more power from all of NATO. So enough on the Ukraine subject. That was maybe the biggest line item from this report. One other small piece, it was expected. There's been a lot of news of drought in India, and India with the recent ban of wheat exports when you think about a ban of wheat exports because of a perception of lower production, you would expect to see a follow-through on a cut of production from the USDA on India wheat, and that was left unchanged today.

Uh, the wheat market is, I think, anticipating that that still does happen, but the rest of the world, after the Ukraine incident, created more of a desire to source wheat from India. And at this point in time, it just, it doesn't seem plausible that we don't see a continued, continued cut in exports out of India, followed by a cut in overall production. Outside of that, there wasn't really much else to do on this WASDE. The market at this point is just going to shift gears back to weather and looking ahead to the June acreage report.

Joe

Paulson: So, you know, You know, talking about the weather thing, Jared, you know, I see that there's a heat ridge, you know, coming in here next week, and, you know, what— can you talk about that a little bit and what kind of effect that could possibly be? You know, it looks like it's not going to stay necessarily super long. What are your thoughts on what you're seeing on the weather side?

Jerod

Creed: I find it very interesting that market participants may get a little concerned about extended heat period coming to the central US, but at the same time, from a production standpoint, I have a hard time finding anybody that's not welcoming some heat with open arms. For the most part, everybody's sitting on a pretty decent moisture profile. It's obviously been a very active storm pattern here in the last couple of weeks. Heat is needed. I've driven enough in the last couple of weeks that at this point in time, I don't think that the late, later than ideal planting is as big of an issue of just how darn cool we've been for the last couple of weeks. The crops are very slow to progress. So on one hand, the heat's going to spark some concern on the supply side from market participants that may reach out for some additional coverage here.

Especially if you run the risk of that heat sticking around longer. But I'd make a pretty solid argument that bringing, you know, a 7 to 15 day above normal temperature is, is exactly what the U.S. Corn Belt needs at this point in time.

Joe

Paulson: I totally agree with that, Jared, that we're— we've been, we've been kind of slow in this area getting planted. It's been cool, cloudy. We have an adequate moisture profile. We're excited about some heat coming in for sure.

Jerod

Creed: I also— Go ahead, Scott.

Scott

Berger: I think I'll just second that. Right now, we need the heat to push this crop along. A good shot of heat to get back to maybe somewhere normal. We're not going to see any tassels by the 4th of July, but if we can push this crop along and get it to where it needs to be by the middle of July, you guys would be very welcome on that. Like you touched on, Jarrett, we just need the people on the other end of that computer to think that this is a negative too.

Jerod

Creed: Yeah, I would say that this week was the first, you know, result of a weather market. We did— I do believe that we did see some price action driven by weather. And, you know, speaking of weather, we should probably just touch on the problem areas in the U.S. right now, especially from a planting standpoint. My contacts in North Dakota, South Dakota, parts of Minnesota, they're going to toss in the towel probably Tuesday, Wednesday of this upcoming week. It's going to be late enough at that point that they're going to stop there. You know, at this point, they've pretty much put a bow on putting in what corn they could. And then in North Dakota, you know, trying to still slip in soybeans, pinto beans, sunflowers, you know, other small grains.

From an acreage perspective, you know, first in a little bit more of a narrow scope, Producers I work with up there got about, you know, in South Dakota, maybe 85 to 90% of their anticipated corn acres, albeit it was a circus to get there because they ended up just planting whatever fields were fit to go that might have actually been intended for soybeans at first. But anywhere from, you know, 70 to 85% of their intended bean acres got planted. When you get into North Dakota, It's lower than that. Most of the farms I work with up there got just a touch over 50% of their anticipated corn acres in. And if, I mean, if Mother Nature holds through the weekend, maybe they'll get a touch over 50% of their intended bean acres in. And I think that's going to be pretty reflective of the two states combined.

I think you do run the risk of losing you know, or at least seeing somewhere between 1.5 million to 2 million acres of prevent plant identified as corn and maybe just as much in beans. You know, don't get too focused on those numbers. Remember that the prevent plant number that is reported has a lot of wiggle room in it based upon what eligibility the operations have to file, you know, a certain amount of acres by crop. And there's no secret that corn prevent plant is, from a financial view, is dramatically better than a soybean prevent plant payment. So you might see that corn prevent plant number be a scope high, but I don't know if that's going to necessarily be reflective of a loss of acres. When all the dust settles, we might end up being very close to what we saw in the March intentions. Somewhere in that 90 to 90 number, maybe closer to a 90 corn and 89 beans if I had to guess.

You know, the only beans, the big needle mover from here forward is just going to be double crop beans throughout the, you know, throughout the wheat belt ranging from, you know, Kansas all the way over to Tennessee, Kentucky, and catching several corn states in between there. I think there's a lot of optimism to get those beans planted and for sure the Central Plains has a phenomenal moisture profile after getting pounded with moisture for the last 30 days.

Scott

Berger: Oh yeah, for sure, for sure.

Joe

Paulson: I had a question, uh, I'm sorry, go ahead, Scott.

Scott

Berger: No, Joe, you're good.

Joe

Paulson: I, I, you know, I also, uh, was hearing today that they came out with some, you know, a new inflation number here and it was higher than expected, highest since— I think it was the Consumer Price Index that it was the highest they've seen since like 1981 or something. And, you know, of course they're starting to talk about higher interest rate hikes and that kind of thing. What kind of effect do you see that having on commodities, you know, either bearish or bullish. Uh, can you expound upon what, what do you think that means for us as producers?

Jerod

Creed: I'd say about 60 to 90 days ago, there started to be some belief that maybe inflation was slowing a touch, maybe we had things under control. But as you came out of the winter months, uh, and you start to see the demand for goods such as gasoline or fuel continue to stay strong and refining capacity limited in the US. Now you're driving energy prices even higher. I'm not sure if we crossed that $5 national gasoline index or not. I know we were very close, been a couple cents here a day or two ago. No secret that diesel's just out of control. And a lot of that, again, is just refining capacity for the actual product. Which has been borderline cut in half in the East Coast over the last couple of years.

So back to the inflation and back to agriculture and these elevated CPI numbers driven by higher price food, higher price fuel, and sneaky suspicion or confirmation, I'd say, of the cost of borrowing money is just going to continue to inch higher. There will and should be a point in time where a segment of the money that is chasing your return in the commodity space will be rewarded to go elsewhere. But we're not there yet. The index fund, a huge component of why we are as high as we are in these grain prices, is more of a passive investor. They just don't care about the fundamental side. They piled in long for months now, and haven't budged. It's not a position that is for sale. They've remained a long participant. Eventually, they could be presented an opportunity to go elsewhere with that money. I don't know what interest rates have to go to, to make that happen.

But it— unfortunately, it probably comes with a lot more pain to the US consumer before that actually does take place. So maybe in a bigger picture, a longer-term view, higher interest rates could come around with a lackluster impact on grain prices for a point in time. But in the last 24 months, it's no secret that ag land prices have absolutely exploded. Just yesterday over in Central Iowa, a full section of ground sold for just under $20K an acre. And that ground less than a decade ago was under 10. So my concern in the ag space might not be directly related to what the grain price does up and down in the near term, but what the spinoff of that looks like if all of a sudden operating money is double what it is today and real estate money is maybe not double, but up 2 2%, 3%, 4%, and then a slightly softer tone to the commodity space. The combination of those is not a pretty picture.

I would say that most farm operations right now that own ground, their biggest risk, risk is both good and bad, would just be a devaluation of farm ground over time. As the cost of money goes up, land values have no choice but to, you know, reduce in value. I don't think that happens overnight. Working capital and cash is being built left and right in this type of market environment, you know, over the last 18 months, and it certainly looks like that opportunity is still on the table to see a positive increase in ag finances all the way through next year. But eventually, I do worry that we run the risk of having the spinoff from 2008 to 2012 repeat itself. Working capital got built and then it started trying to chase a return on the idea that, well, commodities will come back to offset these higher prices and stuff that I'm buying. And it just doesn't happen.

So we find ourselves right back in a 2014 to 2016, '17 glut. Maybe in that 2024 to 2026 timeframe. Maybe a little bit more of a 30,000-foot view to your question. But in the near term, inflation is obviously here to stay. Interest rates are about the Fed's only combatant to take it higher or to control it. And it's reeling out of control right now. You're putting a tremendous pinch on the average US consumer.

Joe

Paulson: I echo those same sentiments. I mean, we did. I mean, after the 2012 party, we, you know, that hangover was rough and it showed that the market does not care if, you know, what our cost of production is and that kind of thing. And, you know, guys just got to keep building working capital and batten down the hatches and be ready for the downturn because it's, uh, it always happens.

Jerod

Creed: You know, speaking of working capital, I really do think, guys, that most operations right now, they need to be creating a goal of where they want their working capital to be alongside the equipment acquisitions or facility upgrades that they know are coming their way. But they need to create a goal of where do I want my working capital to be in 2 or 3 years? And stress test that a little bit. How can I make sure I'm in this position to make sure that if we do turn around and go the other way, hopefully there's enough working capital there to take advantage of a, you know, a negative situation rather than playing defense the entire time.

Joe

Paulson: Yep. Opportunities always come in the downturns. And you got to be ready to pounce on those.

Scott

Berger: So Jared, while you were answering Joe's question there, you touched on demand a little bit. What do you think you see coming on demand destruction when it comes to ethanol along with the fuel and the gas usage, as well as when people start seeing their 401s come down You know, what are we going to do about this, this cattle market and demand for feed?

Jerod

Creed: In my opinion, feed is probably the most vulnerable in the event food prices worldwide stay high or go higher. You will see, you know, especially the middle class and lower, their push for a diet that they have adapted in the last couple of years. Will change because their pocketbook says it has to. But if it doesn't, a real quick comment, the caveat to that is if that doesn't change and prices do stay high, we're just going closer and closer to a financial disaster just because of the debt that your economy, your citizens are going to build to maintain that lifestyle. From the other segments of demand, You know, feed demand worldwide is probably the most susceptible just because of high-priced food. Your other demands such as ethanol, in the short term, they've been firing on all cylinders. Their margin's okay. Uh, they want to keep grinding.

We should have the corn domestically to get ourselves to the doorstep of harvest. I don't have that many concerns in the short term about ethanol demand. Long-term, I would say that the push to green energy, the push in the renewable diesel space, that has maybe a little bit— and the push to, you know, coining the term of, you know, Pete Meyer, Fran, Fran, you guys probably all know him as well, you know, the electrification of the U.S. automobile industry. The push towards that does run the risk of hurting ethanol demand long-term, but it's not something that's going to happen overnight. You know, you might be talking about lower ethanol demand for gasoline that gets, you know, death by a thousand cuts by a couple hundred million bushels a year over a several-year period.

But there is the potential on the backside, and I'm not the expert in this space, but there's, there's a lot of potential on the backside to start helping replace some of the ethanol for fuel for automobiles. To turn some of this corn demand and ethanol into sustainable aviation fuel, which there's been a big push in that space as well. So it's a long answer to your question, but in the here and now, the demand domestically outside of feed is, is really still firing on all cylinders. Our export demand is okay.

Scott

Berger: It's fine.

Jerod

Creed: It's, it can go up and down. It's not gonna— I don't think we're gonna feel a, a reeling impact from that. But if you start to see a slowdown or a change in diets worldwide, your feed demand's just gonna drop from the hog industry, the chicken industry, the beef industry. Uh, you don't have any other choice but to start to reduce, uh, the herd, uh, in all of those segments. And over time, that's obviously going to have a negative impact on our demand for feed.

Scott

Berger: Interesting.

Joe

Paulson: Scott, did you have any other questions?

Scott

Berger: Um, yeah, let's go ahead and turn this and, uh, we'll go ahead and ask, you know, um, Jared, what, uh, what are you telling your clients when it comes to the marketing perspective right now? I mean, we are in that time of the season, the seasonals kick in, You know, weather is going to drive us higher, weather is going to drive us lower. What are you suggesting to guys to put some of this marketing into perspective for us?

Jerod

Creed: First off, just looking at the dollars on the crop that's in the ground, having the luxury of being able to look at bushels sold and unsold bushels in just an insurance perspective. Worst case revenues from an insurance guaranteed yield are still very, very good. But then thinking about more of the, you know, the probabilities of raising somewhere from a 90% to 105% of an APH, of looking at what those profitability situations are on either side of it. But I take the 2021 conversation and, you know, the need for action based upon profitability, I take that one step further to identify just how tight 2022 actually could be. In the last couple weeks you've seen quite the free fall in the fertilizer space. I have some big nitrogen participants, you know, at least in the state of Iowa, telling me that they do feel that anhydrous could be sub-$1,000 a ton this fall.

I don't know if I want to believe that or not. That's right, I said sub-$1,000 a ton. We got a long ways to go to make that happen. Urea's off 20, close to maybe 25% in the last 45, 60 days. Even with those price cuts, we're still likely looking at a higher fertilizer cost than what we experienced for the 2021 crop that's in the ground. But when you look ahead to 2022 and you take into account the inverted market from this year's December corn to next year's December corn, and this year's November beans to next year's November beans, it's not all rosy. In fact, maybe a little tidbit. I don't know if I have more than half the producers I work with that can actually pencil a profit in soybeans in 2023 at this point using an average yield. It's tough. We're going to have a lot of producers spending over $800 an acre to grow a soybean crop next year.

And that's not an easy task to get to that level. And now at the same time in 2021, we're nearing a price point where producers have an opportunity to maybe gross over $1,000 an acre in soybeans, depending on their location. If you're a 60-bushel bean grower, it's all relative, whether it's $900 or $1,000 or $800 for that matter, you're approaching potential revenue per acre levels that has never been been accomplished ever. Don't have anybody that's ever produced over $1,000 an acre in soybeans. If you think about your best bean years, hey, I raised 80 bushel beans, but the market probably was still 10 or sub-10. So the opportunity of 50 bushel, or excuse me, 60 bushel plus beans at above $15, you know, you're at $900 an acre right there. A couple bushel jump on that yield and another 50-some cents in the bean market.

I mean, we got We're honed in right now on that $1,000 an acre revenue number. And again, it's almost from a defensive standpoint that I need that to help offset or absorb a potential challenging situation next year. Just looking at the here and now, what prices are for next year, what our input costs are estimated to be at this point. And then, you know, real quick comment on, you know, profitability in 2023 corn. We're going to have a tremendous amount of producers that are spending anywhere from $1,000 to $1,100 an acre. If, if everything went to hell in a handbasket and the commodity market unwinded itself, but all these costs stay inflated in that period of time, uh, it's not easy to gross $1,100 an acre in corn. It's not easy to gross $1,000 an acre in corn. So you, you do run the risk or a scenario of seeing a, you know, $100, $200 an acre loss next year is not that far-fetched.

So making sure that you're kind of taking a view from a marketing perspective of playing some type of defense in 2022 crops to carry over into what is at least perceived to be a tougher year in 2023 at this point.

Joe

Paulson: Definitely scary times we're entering into. Profitability is obviously very good for 2022, but '23, that's the— and you're right on the fertilizer costs. I mean, you know, last fall, you know, we were seeing potash in the $500 range. So this spring, you know, I, I was, you know, a lot of my local retailers are all, you know, in that $900 range. I mean, even if it comes back a little bit, uh, you know, let's say we have $700 potash in the fall. I mean, we're still, we're still increasing costs here. And, uh, you know, is, is the price going to be there when we need it?

Jerod

Creed: Yeah, I, my personal opinion on the fertilizer looking into next year in relation to— you guys have probably heard me talk about margin protection before. This is the time of the year after planning is over that if you haven't used margin yet, go learn about it for 2023. Just because of the linkage of timing when margin protection is establishing the base price for fertilizer, August 15th to September 15th, lining up with the timeframe that most producers might be forward contracting some fertilizer at that time. So the culmination of booking the fertilizer, booking margin protection, and selling some grain against some of those fertilizer purchases, you know, legitimately we're within 60 days of making some of those bigger decisions for 2023. So don't just get too wrapped up in fertilizer is X price, corn is X price, you know, you got to bring it all together.

And quite frankly, I would take a dollar unit nitrogen with $6.50+ corn every single year. The margin's good at that level. The risk is of buying the higher price fertilizer and not offsetting it with some grain.

Scott

Berger: Excellent advice. Yeah, guys are gonna have to be on their toes when it comes to '23 to market their grain and market their inputs at the same time. I mean, basically lock them in.

Joe

Paulson: So yeah, we can't, uh, we can't be sitting on our hands this summer. We've got to be, uh, looking forward and get some stuff ready to go.

Jerod

Creed: I think it's a once-a-week type of process, to be honest with you. Look at what the price of corn is for next year and look at the price of fertilizer that what you can book and determine how many bushel an acre is it taking me to make that fertilizer expense. It's 4 or 5 bushel an acre higher at $6 plus corn than what we would have been at, you know, $4 to $3.75 corn and, you know, 25 to 30 cent a unit nitrogen.

Scott

Berger: Excellent perspective.

Joe

Paulson: Yeah, so I've got one last bullet for you, Jared. We've touched on a lot today already.

Scott

Berger: What are we as the farmers missing? I mean, with having our attention in a couple of different areas, you know, what are we putting on the back burner and what are we missing that might come and bite us?

Jerod

Creed: It's a pretty darn good question. My mind can go a million different directions there. It's probably back to talking about 2023. I don't want to say that '22 is necessarily bulletproof. But given the calendar where we're at, and being $7-plus corn on the board, there are a lot of decision opportunities to be made in the next 30 days. 30 days going into pollination that I think farms can put them in themselves in position that they're going to make money no matter what happens. No matter what happens. But oftentimes it's hard enough to do enough, right, to take a forward view from '22 out into 2023. I'm in no way, shape, or form saying, oh man, corn is way overpriced and beans are way overpriced for 2023. I'm just pointing out the reality that a modest setback, we're probably talking about breakeven type of prices.

I mean, there's probably less than a dollar a bushel of margin in corn for 2023 for the majority of operations, if they're honest with themselves and what their costs are. I mean, talking about a $5.50 corn breakeven for 2023 is mind-numbing in itself. It is. So just that, that's probably the answer to your question. That's probably just, I can't stress it enough, just take a half a day and go through some of those numbers. Take a half a day and think about the cash flow needs of what you're going to have to have to finance a higher price cost crop in 2023. And think about higher interest rates over the next 12 months and the ability to turn this year's grain into cash in a faster manner, and if you still want to be involved in the market, there are tools to go do that. But we have a goal for most operations. It's not going to be achievable for everybody.

Uh, it may be a little bit of a reach, but I don't, I don't want guys to tap into their operating money until we get past our first half rents for 2023. Some of them are going to be able to accomplish it, some of them won't. Every farm situation is different. But if you think about cutting off 3 months at least of borrowed capital and the interest cost that you incur just in that 3 months versus having operating money borrowed perhaps from, you know, April 1st to the doorstep of harvest, that's one of the fastest ways I think we can keep next year's costs in check. And again, not saying market goes up or down on this year's crop, just given the ability of turning, you know, $7 corn and $15 beans into cash in the first 90 days after harvest, you can cut your cost exposure into next year quite dramatically.

That might be the number one thing actually, just walking through cash flow needs in into next year and not putting yourself in a situation of incurring a higher cost than what you have control to avoid.

Joe

Paulson: Excellent, excellent answer, Jared.

Jerod

Creed: Yeah, absolutely.

Scott

Berger: That was something that I starred on my notes here. So with that, you know, you've answered all my questions and I don't know if you want to take a minute or two to let people know how to get a hold of you and let Joe wrap it up from there.

Jerod

Creed: Yep. One other just market-related comment here. The— back to kind of the Ukraine deal. This is not going to be a situation that gets fixed overnight. We've done enough infrastructure damage. We know we're going to cut supply from this year's upcoming harvest. It's just a matter of how much. It's going to take us some time to dig out of that hole. And our carryouts at this point are probably high enough that they don't, they don't support the current grain prices that we have. And my point in all this is the uncertainty and the conflict that we have worldwide today and the inflation point, that is what is driving these high prices from outside money. That outside money again does not care about your cost of production and quite honestly does not care about U.S. raising 180 bushel corn or 170 bushel corn.

I just think it's worthwhile to point out We could still plant more acres, or excuse me, less acres and have a lower yield and still see commodity prices be dramatically lower than where they are today for absolutely no fundamental reason. So I just, I know I even have clients that you get comfortable, you get maybe a little lackadaisical. Just not suggesting markets got to go up or down, but my personal opinion, we are overpriced from a fundamental standpoint. But it's been a long time that we've had any fundamental reasoning being higher or lower in the market. It goes both ways. When we sold off here recently, that wasn't fundamental. When we rallied as high as we did, that wasn't fundamental. That was just a tremendous amount of money shifting gears. So, if you want to get a hold of me, you know, my office is in Hudson, Iowa. We got another office over in Dunlap, Iowa.

Just phone calls, the easiest. Area code 402.

Joe

Paulson: 6801744. Jared, thank you so much for your time today. I know I learned a ton and it's always good listening to you talk about, you know, things from your viewpoint. Thanks for your time and thanks everybody for listening to the Ag View Pitch.